The true story of the Emperor's New Clothes

Published: Tue, 05/05/20

In the Hans Christian Andersen tale an emperor is convinced by con men to pay a lot of money for an new outfit. The Emperor’s new clothes are supposed to be made of such fine material that only a superior person can see them. When the emperor takes part in a procession watched by all his subjects everyone has been told that the emperor will be dressed in such a fine outfit that only a refined and sophisticated person will appreciate the quality of his dress. The story goes that it took a small boy to shout out that, in fact, the Emperor was stark naked and, in the story, everyone realised and accepted the truth of the situation. So well known is this fable that the expression ‘the emperor’s new clothes’ has become a shorthand for any situation where an obvious reality is being denied by people who should know better.

We are told that human beings are different from all other animals because we have the power of reason and that man is a rational creature. Andersen’s story indicates that actually there is a stage in life, often when we are still very young, that we begin to see the world as it actually is. There is a stage in life when it is both possible to see that the emperor is naked and be willing to shout it out. Our little boy in the story was rational enough to know the difference between dressed and naked and thought it reasonable to express his observation. The story has a happy ending because, despite the embarrassment suffered by the emperor, the whole community is brought to its senses.

In real life reaching the age of reason and expressing rational conclusions about the world triggers the next stage of our education. Learning how to be reasonable and in order to express reasonable and socially acceptable opinions means rationalising our experience. The emperor thought it reasonable that there could be a fabric that only a truly sophisticated person could see. He rationalised the fact that he could not see the cloth himself by assuming that he must be a less sophisticated fellow than he might have hoped but knew better to admit it. The emperor created a belief in the invisible cloth which was then communicated to his people who were expected to rationalise their experience of seeing a naked emperor. The people were also expected to be reasonable and not say anything which might undermine the faith of those who might be struggling to believe in the invisible cloth.

Unfortunately Andersen’s version of the story the story is highly improbable. I accept the belief in an invisible cloth that only a truly refined person could see. That part of the story is a classic example of how a religion gets started. However, in a realistic version of the story the small boy would have been whisked away and his education in being reasonable and rationalising his experience would have begun in earnest. In the true version of the story generations of Emperors would have marched naked on parades. Then there would have come a point when one ruler would catch pneumonia on a particularly cold day. From then on it would still be believed that there was indeed a very special outfit kept in the palace that only a very sophisticated person could see. However, it would no longer practical for the emperor to wear these clothes out of doors any longer. The belief would continue but the application would be rationalised
in a reasonable way. Would that be progress? Or would it be better to keep the rational child alive inside ourselves and to hell with being reasonable? The original story applauds the rational child. The rationalised world of reasonable adults is not sadly not so simple.

Regards

Graham